CP+ 2015: Nikon Interview - 'We learned from the D600 episode'

CP+ Nikon Interview

When we attended CP+ earlier this year in Yokohama, Japan we sat down with senior executives from several major camera and lens manufacturers. We were lucky enough to sit down with a number of Nikon engineers to ask them about their overall strategy with respect to FX vs DX, and DSLR vs mirrorless. We were also able to ask pointed technical questions regarding innovative technologies in Nikon cameras, and the answers were very enlightening. So without further ado...

Can you give us a description of your strategy for APS-C vs. Full-frame DSLRs? How do you see those two product lines developing?

We consider both formats important for us. It just depends on the application on the part of the users, and it also depends on what needs the customer has. But we consider both lines important. As for future product line, we are sorry we cannot answer that question.

Nikon continues to create many more FX format lenses than DX. Does this signify a different approach to the two platforms?

We don’t consider that we manufacture more FX than DX lenses; we’ll focus on both.

So the different number of lenses released for the two platforms – does that mean you’ve had more work to do on full-frame?

We don’t feel we have more FX than DX products now; we have a full line-up in FX as well.

Do you think there’s space in your DX line-up for a professional DX camera? Something to directly replace the D300S?

We have top-end for FX, but we don’t have one for DX. Canon has an equivalent [professional DX] product – the 7D Mark II – which [I assume] is why you ask this question. We will not deny any possibility of developing further lineup in DX, and any range in the future.

Announced six years ago, the D300S was Nikon's last 'professional APS-C DSLR. Could there be another one round the corner?

So FX is not your professional product, and DX is not your consumer product?

No, that’s not how we see these two ranges.

Nikon reacted extremely quickly to the D750 flare issue - much more quickly than to the D600 oil spots problem. Does this reflect a change in approach to feedback and quality assurance?

Thank you for that comment. Every time we encounter an issue, we revisit the QA process. In the case of the D600, we also reviewed the QA process at that time [after the issue was raised]. We’ll continue to improve our QA and service by quickly responding to the customer’s voice.

What did you learn from the D600 episode?

In the case of our handling of the D600 issue, we took too much time before we got our response to the customer. That was an issue we realized, and we took that as a lesson, and took quicker action on the D750. We learned from the D600 episode.

One thing we’ve seen with DSLRs in the D5500 and D3300 class is that as resolution gets higher, AF accuracy becomes critical. With higher-end DSLRs we microadjust focus routinely, but this feature is not available on the D3000/5000 series of cameras. How are you dealing with this issue?

We don’t have micro-adjustment on that class of cameras. We do have stringent quality criteria and standards, and based on these standards, we don’t see any problem with not having micro-adjustment for that class of cameras. But going forward, we don’t deny that this may be an option in the future.

The Nikon D5500 has an advanced 39-point AF system but does not offer autofocus fine-tuning, which makes it less reliable when paired with large-aperture primes, where small focus inaccuracies are made very obvious by the high-resolution 24MP sensor.

So this would not be a problem with mirrorless.

Correct - mirrorless uses contrast AF, and there is no problem as long as contrast detection AF is being used.

The obvious next question is: as resolution increases and mirrorless becomes more practical for AF accuracy reasons, when will Nikon create mirrorless products with an equivalent specification to these entry-level DSLRs?

As for SLRs, we’ll continue to improve accuracy of AF and Live View AF. For mirrorless, we have the Nikon 1 series. We have D-series SLRs, Nikon 1 mirrorless, and our CoolPix line as well. We’ll ensure the best product mix to meet the wide range of customer needs.

The 1-system is 4 years old, and it hasn’t gained wide-spread acceptance among enthusiasts, at least not in the US. If you could go back, knowing what you know now, would you have done anything differently?

The benefit of Nikon 1 is that it’s very small. Its also good at capturing moving subjects, and it’s very high speed. This is a new value proposition to the customer. So, no we wouldn’t have taken a different approach. We have two different categories: the D-line and the 1-series, and with these lineups, we believe we’ll meet all the needs of customers.

Do you think there’s a place for a bigger sensor mirrorless camera in your line-up?

As for the possibility of larger sensor mirrorless - since competitors have already done this, technically speaking it’s possible. However, we want to highlight the advantage of the Nikon 1 system: it’s very small, including its lenses. For example, last year, we launched the V3, and photographers, especially those specializing in aviation industry and birds, highly appreciated the Nikon 1 series’ benefits: portability and small size. We still believe that Nikon 1 has room for further evolution. This is the area we want to put effort in to, rather than making bigger sensor mirrorless cameras.

But when the EVF and grip are attached the V3 is about as large as some APS-C mirrorless cameras and not much smaller than some full-frame models...

Last year we launched the V3 with the 70-300mm telephoto lens, which is equivalent to more than 800mm in terms of full-frame. Yet [the lens] was palm size. So this is the biggest benefit of the Nikon 1 system. On top of that, in the beginning of this year, we announced the development of a SDK for the Nikon 1 series. This will allow it to have advanced camera control abilities. The Nikon 1 cameras are very suitable for quiet operation, so we’ll focus on the remote trigger and control capabilities.

ISO 64 on the D810 was something new, despite the 36MP Sony sensor in the camera typically having a base ISO of 100 in previous cameras. Does this mean that Nikon has a lot of customization and influence over the sensor development, despite it being a Sony sensor?

We can’t speak about [third parties that] we work with. This is a position of Nikon - we will find the areas where we can show our strengths, and we’ll research and develop such areas, and commercialize that technology.

The D810 offers class-leading dynamic range at ISO 64. Those graduated ND filters in your bag from your days of shooting Velvia are quickly becoming less relevant- here's a single exposure shot with a D810 that captures an impressive scene dynamic range. We were curious as to why the new D810A, specialized for astrophotography, only goes down to a rated base ISO of 200.

Why is the base ISO of the D810A ISO 200, whereas the D810 goes down to ISO 64? We’ve found the Raw dynamic range to be class-leading at ISO 64 on the D810.

What we did for the D810A is new to us: we changed the characteristics of the IR cut filter in front of the image sensor. We transmit four times as much light at 657nm [as usual]. Because that sensitivity went up significantly, we couldn’t achieve a base ISO of 64. In other words, the D810A has better sensitivity in red areas, and the resulting color balancing leads to higher blue and green sensitivities. This leads to the higher base ISO of 200.

We like the introduction of electronic front curtain in the D810, but we think it would be very useful if it were available in all shooting modes, especially if paired with short exposure delays. The first press of the shutter button could move the mirror up and open the shutter, and after a short delay, the exposure could be initiated electronically.

Thank you very much for your idea!

If you offered delays shorter than one second, such an implementation could work for hand-held shooting and would eliminate all potential sources of sharpness-reducing vibrations.

Yes, the D810 has special requirements in terms of shutter speed, so we can’t follow the regular sequence other models have. We understand your comments though and the potential needs, so we will explore the possibility in the future.

If you had to convince a first-time camera buyer to invest in a D5500 over - say - a Sony a6000, what would you tell them?

I think the optical viewfinder is a strong point of our SLR system. This allows users to be able to take pictures as they see [them]. This is our competitive advantage. Of course mirrorless is smaller, but our SLRs offer other advantages, such as our family of lenses and accessories. The D5500 is a great introduction to SLR photography.

Nikon's 3D tracking offers class-leading subject tracking, allowing the camera to track an initially chosen subject (the eye, in this case) despite subject, or camera movement. Cross-type AF points (shown in blue), however, are limited to the central region only.

One of the shortcomings of Nikon’s AF sensors are the more centrally-located cross-type points. Do you plan to employ cross-type points spread further across the frame?

Using cross-type sensors may help improve AF performance, and we know that Canon is using cross-type sensors in many different models. However, this does come at a higher cost, and we have to take all these factors into consideration. Including not just the number of cross sensors, but also the area and layout of the sensor.

We understand there are pros and cons, but we have to strike a balance. For example, our recent AF systems now work down to -3 EV. We must consider the needs of our target users – in this case, whether or not they need cross-sensors.

What is the most difficult challenge for you as resolution of sensors increases?

There are a number of elements involved: (1) the image processing capability to process the ultra-high resolution images; (2) capturing the pictures without vibrations; (3) the capabilities of the lenses to capture all the detail; and (4) AF accuracy.

Editors' note:

This interview was a tough one to edit, partly because it was conducted with several interlocutors, and partly because much of it was 'off the record'. Hopefully though, if you've read this far you'll have learned a few things. We were encouraged to hear Nikon representatives acknowledging the company's slow response to the D600's oily sensor issue, and it's obvious that lessons have been learned. The much less serious 'flare-gate' problem that affected some D750 bodies was dealt with much more quickly, and this kind of responsiveness builds customer trust.

Users of Nikon's APS-C format DSLRs and lenses should be reassured too that Nikon appears (or certainly claims) to be placing equal importance on development of DX and FX. We've yet to see this pay off in terms of DX lens development, but the D7200 (which was released after this interview was conducted) is certainly a very strong player in the high-end APS-C class. There's some hope too for people waiting for a 'D400' - in our interview, Nikon executives actually admitted that they don't have a 'top-end' APS-C DSLR like the Canon EOS 7D II. While not by any means a confirmation that Nikon is working on one, we definitely got the impression that the executives we were speaking to believe that there's room for a 'professional' DX format DSLR in their lineup. You (didn't quite) read it here first.

We spent quite a lot of time in this interview talking about two challenges facing DSLR makers in an era of 24MP+ resolution sensors. Namely, AF accuracy and shutter/mirror vibration-induced softness. Both of these problems are largely side-stepped in mirrorless designs (although it took many manufacturers a while to really address shutter shock, and cameras like the Sony a7R have still not remedied this issue). Starting with autofocus, as a consequence of their reliance on off-sensor phase-detection AF modules, all DSLRs are vulnerable to AF inaccuracies. These issues become more and more noticeable at higher capture resolutions, and with faster lenses. High-end DSLRs tend to offer some kind of AF fine-tuning, but it's a cumbersome process, and only valid for one subject distance and one focal length.

Worse, entry-level models like Nikon's D5500 and Canon's Rebels don't even offer any provision for AF adjustment at all (though you can send your body and lens in for adjustment by the manufacturer). This make shooting with fast prime lenses something of a lottery when it comes to AF inaccuracy (trust us, we've tried it). There is innovation on this front - Sigma's USB dock, for example, allows for calibration of four different subject distance and focal length ranges with their lenses. Canon offers calibration for two ends of a zoom, and holds patents for using sensor-based contrast-detect AF to self-calibrate phase-detect modules (though we haven't seen any fruits of this patent yet).

What Nikon brings to the table with regards to accurate autofocus is the most usable and trust-worthy subject identification and tracking to date - which ensures that the camera focuses on what you want it to focus on. To be frank, Nikon's '3D' subject tracking leaves its competition in the dust. However, we were specifically curious if Nikon was working on any advancements to AF accuracy and precision of their modules in combination with their lenses, but were only able to get a generic statement that they are working towards higher standards for AF calibration and tolerances.

The other major challenge faced by DSLR manufacturers is shutter/mirror vibration-induced softness. Flagship products like the D800-series must be shot very carefully if mirror and shutter-induced softness is to be avoided at certain shutter speeds. And though Nikon's redesign of the mirror and inclusion of electronic front curtain in the D810 is a huge step forward, the reality is that it's still practically difficult to get the most out of these high resolution sensors. The D810 in particular has usability issues around its otherwise excellent electronic front curtain in that it's limited to Mirror Up mode. Furthermore, all high resolution offerings from all brands exhibit deleterious interactions between mirror/shutter vibrations and optical stabilization systems (our initial tests of the Canon EOS 5DS show that it is no exception).

In the end, this requires a meticulous approach to shooting, or often limiting yourself to certain shutter speeds, in order to maximize the resolution offered by these sensors. On a positive note, when we raised these points with Nikon engineers in our meeting, it sparked a lengthy off-record discussion.

And that brings us to our final point: we were particularly impressed by the open respect displayed of competitor's offerings: Nikon themselves openly admitted that the 7D II was a top-of-the-line professional DX camera, and that Canon's use of cross-type sensors across their entire AF array is an advantage. They were also very open to critical feedback- when we mentioned particular issues, Nikon executives were very interested in continuing conversations and critically analyzing our feedback. This attitude speaks highly of the company, and makes us confident that Nikon is interested in listening to good ideas to make their products better. And that's really the best you can hope for.

It's nice they learned about quicker customer-service response with the D600 manufacturing flaw, but it's not nice that they didn't learn about quality control, as evidenced by the repeat of a manufacturing defect in the rush to release the D750, or that they didn't mention any emphasis on improving the QC process after both disasters.

And they were disasters, because the sense of Nikon off-the-shelf dependability is gone, and after being a victim with the D600 and the D750, I will never buy another new Nikon body until after it's been out long enough to hit its first price reduction. And if I were not a lifetime Nikon user, from when the FTn was the top-line model, and did not have a large lens investment, I would switch to Canon for the next upgrade. As you might guess, I consider the back-to-back QC failures and the way Nikon handled them to be inexcusable!

I am a little bit surprised, that since the D600 and D750 Quality problems get so much Attention, the other Quality Problems of poor exposure/metering (of the D5500 and probably also of some other Nikon DSLRs) is not getting any attention.

Of course: there is a difference between these quality Problems: the problem of the poor exposure can be adressed by the Nikon user (e.g. with use of a photo-Editing Software like Lr or with exposure bracketing).

But poor exposure/metering is neverthelerss a quality problem (that I encounter ith my new D5500 and do not encounter with my old D5000). Are other long-year and loyal Nikon users (and dpreview and Nikon itself) really not caring about that quality Problem?

The shortcomings you mention are indicators of a systemic QC problem and are not inconsequential, but when you highlight product problems of a company, you can't name them all to make a point, so the worst ones are put out there as an example, the ones that have no user-compromise fix, that require the user to go without the product for a repair return, the ones that are all the more grievous because of the category and price of the product. I also never owned the DXXXX cameras, but did own the D600 and do own the D750, so it is to be expected that would also be a reason to single them out.

I would have wished, that in the discussions between DPR and Nikon that one other additional problem would have been discussed: the inaccurate metering of the D5500 (I guess, that the D7200 too has a similar problems).

As the Review of the D5500 on the DPReview Website states: Nikon DSLRs have the tendency to overexpose. ...I too encounter this problem with my new D5500 (this is a problem, that i do not encounter with my old and beloved D5000). Other DP Review readers mention and complain about washed-out colors (I have not yet sufficient experience with my D5500 in order to understand whether "overexposure" and "washed-out colors" are the same or distinct problems)

Of course, the overexposure problem can be addressed with Photo Editing Software or with Exposure bracketing. But for regular (non-professional) photographers, it is really a nuisance to be forced to do something like that for most photos.

What I would really love to have: an excellent Nikon DX Camera that exposes correctly the majority of the shot photos. This is what I miss the most in my new D5500 (which for that reason, does not merit (despite all its other advantages) in my eyes the DPR Silver Award).

My day-dream: to have these problems addressed for my otherwise excellent D5500 by some kind of Nikon-provided fix.

Wish you would have discussed VIDEO with them. Most video pro's are using Canon or Panasonic GH series. (Do an article on VIDEO and post user data and comments!) I do media work in Asia and use a DSLR camera for both stills and video. But I do documentary style, "on the go". DSLR is often a bit shaky, zoom is manual, and IS is set up for stills, but not good for video. I sold my D90 and D7000 to a friend and recently dumped Nikon for a mirrorless Panasonic FZ1000. Only a 1" sensor, but my clients don't print out pix at large sizes, end result is often only web. I LIKE more depth of field. I like 12fps. I like 4k. I like AMAZING 5-axis IS. And the autofocus is better/faster than my Nikons. (Not sure about tracking aspect, haven't tested it yet.) Strictly speaking, the still image quality is lacking, however, this camera has the speed to GET the MOMENT that other's cannot. It's got a built-in 25-400 f2.8-4. I love this "Bridge" camera. Wish NIKON and Canon offered a similar model.

Canon eos - m - love it or hate it (have you ever used one?) but it turns out great pics & vids - of course its not perfect and its no GH4 but I MUCH prefer the picture quailty to the Olympus 5 Pen I have used - nasty colours (have you ever tried one?) so unlike the Nikon 1 the ASP-C format M does have a future.

wish you guys could of at least asked about video options for us old school nikon pro's with tens of thousands of dollars worth of nikon FX glass just waiting for a decent clean nikon body with 4k video, so we can use all our nikon glass on it..

90% of my business income is now from working with video.. and all my nikon glass is just sitting on a shelf waiting for something like a mirrorless 4k video based NX1/A7s but with a nikon mount... and it's not going to happen in my lifetime is it Nikon ?

It was nice to read from DPR, "in our interview, Nikon executives actually admitted that they don't have a 'top-end' APS-C DSLR like the Canon EOS 7D II." It's the first time from DPR I have read anything that implies the 7D II is in a space by itself, unmatched by Nikon. (You'll recall the 7D II review fawned all over Nikon's four-year-old DX competitor for its superior imagery.)

It was also nice to read when DPR asked, "So FX is not your professional product, and DX is not your consumer product?" that Nikon replied with, "No, that’s not how we see these two ranges." As a pro myself I shoot over 90% of my work on an APS-C because I need the reach and a huge DOF.

So now that those two things are off my chest, I found it an interesting and very insightful interview. I'm not sure it promoted their agenda and talking points in the most powerful way, but it was a terrific read. Thanks for posting it.

- to keep mechanic and small mount to long- AF-S is 5 years late, only from 2003 on- giving up the most affordable scanners on the market- Fullframe 5 years behind competition- VR far to late in super-tele-photo- giving up own FX/DX Sensors- Nikon 1 - sensor to small to compete, cameras to expensive for starters- Fullframe is now the only way ahead- D400 is lost in time- DO/PF lens 4,0/300 mm is 13 years late and will not work with fast AF with extender- very bad marketing

Q: How do you manage problem A?A: We don't see A is a problem. But we do not deny that in future we may make products without A problem.Q: Do you plan to make product B?A: We don't see any demand in product B. But sometime in future (maybe weeks, maybe decades) when we make product B we'll see huge demand for it.

I wish Nikon improved overall AF accuracy issues out of the factory with their FF cameras. Case in point: My brand new D810. Superb new shutter balance mechanism vs D800 (much better handheld results), nice improved dynamic range, electronic first curtain, etc, but why do I have to dial in MORE AF fine tune correction (+15 almost consistently) than my previous D800? Hell, why do I even have to do this at all? And since I HAVE to, it's ridiculous that there's only one fine tune setting. What about near and far distance AF fine tune for the same lens (a la Sigma)? The need to have to fuss with a fundamental camera function like AF is something that Nikon should solve and make simple for everyone.

Also, I don't agree about optical viewfinders giving a WYSIWYG experience as the interview answer says. This is the realm and clear advantage of Mirrorless cameras with EVFs, not DSLRs. With the DSLR, you still have to shoot and chimp and shoot and chimp......

Well they may have learned, but the D600 debacle keeps on giving lessons. Mine has been back to Nikon three times with problems. And on Thursday, electronics in the viewfinder failed so I can no longer focus. Back it goes again.

What I like about them is they stand behind their product and the plan they started. I'm talking about their Nikon 1 system. If you'd ask the same question from team Canon the response would be: M?! What is M? We did not produce it! SL1? What the heck is that? We would not produce it ...

Nikon states: 7dII top of the line crop! Agree! And no D400.... Yet DPReview gives Silver...to a 7d2 camera-- that is an artist's brush (body) with great paint (canon glass) in a class of its...own ;) oh well, Lone Ranger had Silver, right! my advice-- deep six that checklist of theirs and head for the pro sports fields. Also I was looking for the question on the Sony deal for a 50 mpxl -- and thinking, will they rush into it and botch that launch too -- they need another 1 yr exclusivity too -- or will they take the time -- which could be a year or two. By that time, will Sony need them anymore or just vertically nudge them out by saying -- no exclusive agreement?

Our 7D2 review was actually pretty glowingly positive if you actually read the whole thing. The decision of whether or not it gets a Silver or Gold (or no award) is, in the end, a subjective one left up to the reviewer. There were enough things wrong with the camera that - mind you - no other review of that camera even tested to our knowledge, that we didn't feel it deserved a Gold. We enumerated those clearly. You can disagree with the importance of those parameters we weighted, but you can't disagree with the reviewer's opinion that the lower performance of the camera for those attributes mattered to him as a photographer.

Subjective is weak when you don't consider the best artist's brush for sports and wildlife for under $2K. We can always disagree. No other sub $2K camera (artist brush) with artist paint ( Canon lens system, particularly the 70-200 F2.8 II and the 100-400 II for sports and wildlife) can match this capability for major sports and wildlife for the $. Don't use a general checklist on it. Recognize it for what it is -- the best in its price class for sports and wildlife ie, gold as a sports/wildlife artist's brush. We didn't have to pay $6K for it. We can buy a sub $1000 camera for the other stuff your site cherishes so much. Many have multiple cameras these days, but when an artist goes to paint sports and wildlife, they take the brush and the paint that is in a class of it's own, the 7d2 with canon action glass.

You met armandino in the d7200 thread who shoots for a living 1dx and 7d2 in sports – 250,000 shots per year. My friend also shoots pro sports for a living 1dx and 7d2 – 500,000 shots per year.As full time action and sports pros, do they consider 10 – 12 fps with pro AF system and pro action glass fundamentally essential to their livelihood? Absolutely! Take deep dof mirror-less into NBA arena with it’s $3K 70-200 f2.8 where you need to shoot wide open and cover the court and it gets trumped every time by Canon and Nikon.Jack shows iTr is even useful at 90% hit rates for occasional real times where that function is useful.http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55089227Sports Amateurs have their weightings and check sheets. Sports Pros use 10-12 fps, pro AF system, and pro glass (at a reasonable price). It’s the three categories Rishi, not one. Ask enough sports pros, then you’ll have the overall rating answer. There are no mirror-less on the sidelines of major pro sport venues.

Well, photographers pay a lot more money than $1700 for as you say excellent sports / action. Also the exposure system is new and the best in the Canon line. I've also enjoyed the anti-flicker mode and the silent shutter. IQ and high iso is better than my 5dc I had for 5 years and liked. It is the real deal as the sports brush - an easy gold for those that love this brush!

MAC please don't get as mad, this is a matter of envy. The 7dii is a gold camera for what it was designed, period. And for the price it is actualky double gold but dpr tests results are insignificant statistically and maybe even biased by what amazon wants them to sell. Check lensrentals article review of the camera review sites, a point made that still Rischi doesn't understands related to test design and sample sizes. Ultimately what all this means is that the scoring system used here at dpr and in sites like dxo is insignificant or irrelevant. Of course anybody with a couple of statistics courses will tell this.

@lacikuss, agree, other review sites understand what af accuracy, 10 fps, and canon glass system means for $1700! DPReview is obsessed with mirror-less and 4+ stop pushes at iso 100. They'll give d7200 a gold because they think 6 fps is enough. 6 fps is not enough - for the decisive moments. that is why Canon and Nikon charge 3 times as much for their 1 series 10-12 fps. Nikon didn't build the d400. The 7d2 is about reach too with less costly lenses -- that the 1dx requires more expensive, heavier lenses for this reach.

The high resolution/sharpness problem makes it much more advantageous to choose a mirrorless system with IBIS, such as Olympus. Also, one always has the possibility of choosing lower resolution for subjects that do not require very high amount of details, such as weddings, travel in general,family, etc. For the rest, the D810 requires a tripod, an old, tested and true method.

But.. many mirrorless cameras suffer from shutter shock which can make shooting at normal handheld speeds an issue. Even if it's on a tripod. Solution: Add a delay to the shutter.And the high res mode of the EM-5M2 requires you to use a tripod and slow shutter speed as a MUST. At least with the D810 you can shoot at a faster shutter speed to obtain a high res image.Points which you ignore for some reason..

As a Nikon FF and E-M1 user myself, the E-M1 is far more handholdable in general, shutter shock be damned, because of the incredible 5-Axis IBIS that works with all my m43 and adapted lenses. The M5M2's high res shot setting is an unique exception to the case (but let's applaud here: what a clever feature!), but in general, I feel a lot more free shooting with the M1 on the street. The D810 needs a lot more fussing.

And yes, the electronic front curtain option in my E-M1 has alleviated the shutter shock issue. I think this is available in other OM-D models as well

FWIW, I have compared a friend's M5M2 using the hi-res shot setting and the D810 output of some same scenes. When the Olympus gets it right, the image resolution and lack of aliasing is much better than a single D810 shot. It's not good for moving things of course, but still, a tremendous feature to introduce.

Nikon is heading dead end. They are in the end of the train.No modern ergonomics. No real focus peaking. No good mirrorless with aps-c sensor. Useless adding and then removing functionality of cameras.

Currently, i am having more hope toward to Olympus, Fuji, Sony and Samsung.

i was surprises that nikon has à open ear about ideas and is willing to give good answers to the questions.i hope the commercial drive of working whit different companies togehter does nor slow them down in devolpment.Great job from interviewer!!

Well, after sending seven times my D800 for AF adjustment I gave up on Nikon. Selling all my gear and waiting for a mirrorless interchange solution. Sony alpha is too captive regarding its lens choices and performance, my guess is that they will drop prices soon and that will bring volume and third party lenses.

"And that's really the best you can hope for." - Um. No.The best you can hope for is something like the interviews that Fuji execs and engineers give.

Nikon have great tech, bundled in crippled products.They really seem to embody the worst of the stereotypes of staid, reserved, secretive, cradle to grave industrial age corporations - they seem to want control, not conversation.

That doesn't come accross in the published interview excerpts (I assume it is not the entire on record interview).Perhaps it might be useful to publish the entire on record transcript?

As an example Q: "Can you give us a description of your strategy for APS-C vs. Full-frame DSLRs? How do you see those two product lines developing?"A: "We consider both formats important for us. It just depends on the application on the part of the users, and it also depends on what needs the customer has. But we consider both lines important. As for future product line, we are sorry we cannot answer that question."

In my view a conversation might discsuss what needs Nikon sees their customers as having, which products they see as fitting those needs and perhaps some polite back and forth on the interviewr's views of customers needs - you guys do actually interact with us after all, as well as being customers yourselves.Followed by yes we have (or don't have) something like that coming up.

Then you'd publish that, we'd moan about it, or applaud it or go "meh" or whatever and you'd report that back, next meeting and the direction might change a based on all the input that Nikon has had, and they'd tell you that.

A real back and forth information age conversation.

Instead we get something akin to "we'll do what we think is best for the customer - but we won't tell you what that is".Which a long drawn out, reasonably polite way to say "No - we won't give you an idea of how those lines are developing".

I'm sure they think they are protecting their interests in tightly controlling all of the little info they let out, but I am in no way convinced it is true, and I am positive it is not "serving their customers".

Serving their customers would be releasing info (e.g. a "roadmap" ) so that customers who wanted to (i.e. the repeat customers) could make planned buying decisions.

E.g. if you're not gonna make a D400, then just say it. If you are say it.

I don't really care about a D400, personally, but that is a representative example of a class of customers who are frustrated to say the least and angry in some cases because Nikon won't talk to them about the things they want to talk about.

They're not having a substantive an honest conversation.I don't know why, though I have my (increasingly cynical) suspicions, but they are simply not talking to those customers.

Yes fair points. I like your idea of having an actual conversation with specifics of perceived customer needs. We'll have to do that next time. I guess that this time around we stuck to higher-level questions to see if they would give some of these insights on their own, but maybe very specific directed questions at perceived needs would be more appropriate. Then again, even those questions might have been invaded.

We also wanted to open the floor up to you for ideas of questions to be asked. We just never got around to it with the rush of everything before the conference.

As I said in another post, it sounded more like an interrogation than an interview with you posing the questions and Nikon denying or trying to say as little as possible so as not to incriminate themselves.

It's not their fault, not even the PR department's. They are who they are. The DP Review's concluding discussion was informative and worth reproducing--as is most of the content on your excellent Website. The interview itself was worthless and publishing it looks like a journalistic error.

Yeah - sorry. There's not much we can do about that! To be honest though the off-record portion didn't include disclosure of secrets, so much as detailed discussion of some of the issues raised in the interview.

From exec. replies above..."We have top-end for FX, but we don’t have one for DX. Canon has an equivalent [professional DX] product – the 7D Mark II– which [I assume] is why you ask this question. We will not deny any possibility of developing further lineup in DX, and any range in the future. "So does this confirm that D7200 or D7100 was not intended to be the top end of DX with this comment, and that maybe a D400 (or renamed D9300) might be coming to compete with 7Dmark2.Many retailers are advertising the D7200 (or previous D7100) as top end DX. I suppose in marketing the D7200 this makes sense.

Would have also liked to see a question of why use a microSD in Nikon 1 line as the only card instead of SD. (J5 and V3) Maybe for its intended consumer target, they thought it would be okay to use.

Of course they can't disclose their roadmap and because of culture aspects and not loosing their face they can't confirm they had done anything wrong in the past and would do it differently if they would start all over again.

Even though I typically expect these kind of political answers that don't say anything I am surprised that most of the answers are even more extreme as they sound like Nikon don't need to do much development in the future because their current products match already everything the customers might demand.

Maybe Nikon meets the customer demand of the Japanese market, but looking at the overall declining sales of Nikon, maybe Nikon should rethink their answers ... actually rather rethink their strategy.

In regards, to the Nikon 1 not having wide area appeal in the west, compared to competitors like m43, I would think doing customer surveys in the west on what consumers are looking for in mirrorless (and feature set), might help. Canon and Nikon are protecting their DSLR entry line with small light DSLR bodies like D5500 to compete at consumer level, with access their lens collections, makes sense, which sell well enough, and Nikon says OVF being an important feature in these executives replies they would keep to distinguish product.

These are the people that should be kicked out ASAP.A Day when the Nikon will sink just like the Kodak these are the people that have let it to happen.Pathetic answer. No vision. Not offer the products that the customers are asking for. Continuous QC problems after problems... Snake oil products. Overpriced stuffs...

@Adrian Van "In regards, to the Nikon 1 not having wide area appeal in the west, compared to competitors like m43" - I found the 1 series comments about "small and light" interesting too.

My feeling is that Nikon is asking people what they want and people are saying small and light. I think the problem is there are basically two kinds of people. One class will never buy a single use product bigger than a phone.The others want small and light but value IQ. For the most part that's us here and most of us want more IQ than the 1 series can deliver.The 1 is too big for the phone people and has insufficient IQ for we of the DPR crowd.

Nikon could jump on this by bringing out a D300 successor that is mirrorless, half the size, with a new mount and an adaptor for the old mount. Then convert all the rest of the DX cameras to mirrorless and start bringing out a complete line up of lenses to the new mount. They have already shown that they know how to build a mirrorless that focuses better than the best efforts of the competition with the N1. But they won't, because they compete with Canon and they have not done it.

For me their best bet is mirrorless Dx or FX but keeping compatibility with existing lenses (maybe adapter would be included or very cheap). That would be the most "client friendly" response Nikon would do. Unfortunately I would have probably sold all my gear. Petty they are so slow.

After reading this, my worst fears are confirmed. Nikon is so out of touch with reality that I'm going to sell all my Nikom gear and either go Canon or Olympus, with those amazing lenses, as I wind down my career and retire to a photo amateur again.

Can there be any justification for their clueless responses to the need to junk the N1 and its ludicrously tiny sensors? I don't think so. It's the typical Nikon executive "we know better than the customer" attitude that makes them seem so backwards and obtuse. Seem? No, are!

Totally agree, the N1 is like some incumbent car manufacturers making the ugliest possible EV then say, see ? It does not sell. That 1" sensor is excellent but not with lenses that open at 3.5 to 5.6! This is rubbery from Nikon. They should not insult customers, if they make such package, go ahead and offer proper aperture such as Sony did with the fantastic RX100M3 or RX10.Olympus is an excellent choice for me as well, lenses are indeed up to expectations. I am just a little unsatisfied with 16MP sensor. My bet is that they should come up soon with a backlit 4/3 sensor of 24 Mp that will outperfom a lot of full frame classical FF in the market. I also like the high resolution functions lie introduced with the new OMD 5 II. That would give 60MP for landscape, 24 MP with full color rendering (No Bayer interpolation) for studio work and 24 Mp for sports and everyday usage!

Oh how many remember the President of Nikon ...Akihero Nikon saying...way back in 2007ish...We are not going to play the MP War with Canon...Canon was sitting there with their old dusty 21mp...and bam..Here comes Nikon's D800 with a fresh clean Sony 36.3 MP Sensor.

Now...Canon Announces ...their new 50mp Cameras...but will not be delivered until the last week of June..but most folks will not see theirs until Oct and Nov.

But hang onto your wigs and keys...Sony has produced their own 50mp Sensor..NOT being used by Canon...But for their own A9 or A7rll and plus...Nikon's D900. Yep. D900.

...and Canon is doing what has been done before over three years ago..D800/E.

But I am not a Nikon Fan all the time.. Nikon Shot themselves in the foot..along with Canon..of not delivering a True Blue Mirrorless Camera with the goods in it. IE..24mp plus at the beginning...10mp? Really Nikon..Really? That was a fail from out the gate. Oh Well Sony Got it..plus FF.

How is Canon doing what Nikon did three years ago...you just said yourself they're about to come out with a 50mp camera. So it appears Nikon, Sony and Canon will be on equal footing in that one narrow metric.

Canon is 3 years behind Nikon's Schedule of Catching up. Remember the D800/E...Canon is about to release their versions of it...BUT..wait...More to the story...Nikon Still is going one up..with their own Higher MP. Sony is also.

I think the OP was referring to the AA vs. AA-canceling filter route. It could be argued that those who want high resolution really just want high resolution, and so Nikon decided to get rid of the AA filters altogether in the D810. That makes the D810 (and a7R) the sharpest 36MP cameras out there, as the AA-canceling filter implementation still has some impact on sharpness.

Furthermore, the higher your resolution, the less and less the likelihood that aliasing will be a common issue. It could, then, be argued that the Canon 50MP cameras have even less of a need for an AA filter version compared to the D810/a7R.

Even we were a little surprised by the decision to make a version with an AA filter. But once you made one with an AA filter, it's usually cheaper for a company to make a 2nd version with an AA-canceling filter as opposed to removing the AA filter altogether, b/c you can maintain the total sensor stack thickness if you replace one of the birefringent filters w/ another one.

Sometimes pictures speak loud and clear. Line up like a bunch of soccer guys walling a free kick near the goal - family jewels well and truly protected... Apparently they came expecting some hard shooting.

DPR did try. Bounced off the corpo-speak wall, but given that picture I guess we can't be surprised.

More about gear in this article

The D850 was just announced, and by all accounts it's shaping up to be a very impressive DSLR. But should you upgrade your current camera? In this article, we've broken down the D850's main selling points compared to several popular models.

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.

The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.

Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.

The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.